Links to Awesome

Wednesday, September 30, 2009

Sarah Palin, the former Conservative Republican Governor from the state of Alaska, and John McCain's Vice-President selection vowed to support all Conservatives who run for office, whether they be a Republican or a Democrat. Will Mrs.Palin stand by bold statement, and endorse a third party Conservative candidate, whom is really the only Republican candidate in this special congressional election in the 23rd congressional district in New York state?

Meet Doug Hoffman, a proud Conservative Republican from the north country of Upstate New York, a region which has been represented by Republicans since the 1800's, a region that is far more Conservative then the 20th congressional district, which held their own special election back in March, the Democrat won by just 700 votes over Conservative Republican Jim Tedisco. Hoffman has been involved in Republican politics for decades, however, after the party chairs decided to go with "Dede" Scozzafava a liberal Republican who has even been supported by the ACORN backed "Working Families party" several times, Hoffman knew a real Conservative Republican option was needed for the voters of the 23rd congressional district.

Doug Hoffman is the only pro-life candidate in this election.

Doug Hoffman is the only 100% pro-business candidate in this election.

Doug Hoffman is the only candidate who no connections to ACORN.

Doug Hoffman is the only candidate who is a real Conservative, and better yet, a real Republican.

How does this involve Governor Sarah Palin you might ask? Well she created a PAC, designed to support Conservatives running across the United States of America, with a very crucial election set to take place in just 34 days, a real Conservative needing all of the help he can get, will Governor Palin stand by her comments and support any Conservative who runs, or will she not?

Fred Thompson has endorsed Doug Hoffman. The Club for Growth PAC has endorsed Doug Hoffman. The American Conservative Union has endorsed Doug Hoffman. All very respected Conservatives or Conservative leaning political based organizations.

Will Sarah Palin do likewise? That is the question for the ages, and only time will tell.

Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Over the past several months, I have heard numerous calls for Congressman Rangel to resign, I 100% agree with those calls, however, in recent days I have heard some ponder why Rangel is still in the United States Congress, that is why I am writing this article.Congressman Charles Rangel, first elected to the United States House of Representatives in 1970, representing New York's fifteenth congressional district like a lord with ultimate power. Over the past several months, it has been revealed that Rangel, who is the head of the all-power House Committee on Ways and Means (deals with tax laws), has not reported hundreds of thousands to possibly millions of dollars in income to the Internal Revenue Service, not to mention Rangel is a race baiter to the highest degree, and told a citizen journalist to mind his own "G****mn business" when asked about cheating the IRS.

Why is Congressman Rangel after cheating the IRS hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars, especially when he is the head of the committee which deals with tax laws, still in the United States Congress, then again why he is still in Congress after near four decades of constant election and numerous race baiting instances.

The fifteenth congressional district is D+41, elected Obama with 93% of the vote, located deep in the heart of New York City, the Congress is lead by liberal Democrats who have no sense of ethics, and did I mention the results from the 2008 congressional election? Well, I saved the worst for last.

With the full knowledge that Rangel lied about his income to the IRS, that he has major ethical problems, among other controversies, the voters of the fifteenth congressional district re-elected Rangel with nearly 90% of the vote, and added another near 3% of the vote for even more radical candidates over the Republican candidate.

Rangel is corrupt. The fifteenth congressional district is corrupt for re-electing Rangel. The Congress is corrupt for not ordering a full investigation & impeachment of Rangel.

During the Bush era, with two wars raging in the Middle East, President Bush would be in contact with his Generals once a week, sometimes daily, no-one can argue that fact, Bush was a hands on man when it came to wars on terrorism. It has recently been revealed that Obama has only talked with his General once in seventy days, according to history, Bush would have spoken to his General at least ten times in that same time period.

Silence speaks louder then words.

While some make the point that the debate over the surge took three months, I can guarantee President Bush actually payed attention to what his General's we're suggesting for the future of Iraq, not paying his attention to everything but the wars on terrorism, like Obama, who seems more interested in expanding the school year and getting Chicago the 2016 Olympic bid.

What has happened to America's foreign policy? Our General's on the ground need more troops now, we know that a surge is a successful military strategy, and we do not have time to let the pantywaist liberal jackasses to get in the way of winning in the wars against pure evil.

I personally believe Obama has two options, either demand that General McChyrstal's request be met, or resign as President, as he would be un-fit to be the commander in chief of the United States Military.

Monday, September 28, 2009

Fellow Republican blogger, and proud linker Dan Cirucci is pondering over the seemingly surprising poll which shows that New Jersey voters are tending anti-Obama on several key issues, while it may be surprising due to the fact New Jersey is thought of as a liberal blue state, an investigation would show that New Jersey is a blue state, but not like New York or Massachusetts is.

During the 2004 Presidential election, Senator John Kerry carried the state by a 52.0-46.2% margin over then President George W. Bush.

During the 2008 Presidential election, then Senator Barack Obama carried the state by a 57.14-41.61% margin over Senator John McCain.

Five of New Jersey's thirteen congressional seats are Republican, with only one that switched sides last year, only by a slim margin in the third congressional district, however, with a far-left liberal currently elected to that district, I wouldn't put the seat flipping back to Republican hands out of question.

If you go even deeper, the New Jersey Legislature is also heavily represented with Republicans, as Republicans hold 17 of the 40 seats in the New Jersey Senate, and Republicans hold 31 of 80 seats in the New Jersey version of the House of Representatives, not to mention Chris Christie is leading the current Democrat Governor by nearly ten point margins with 37 days to election day.

While New Jersey is a historically a Democrat state, New Jersey is not far-left liberal state like New York, Massachusetts, Delaware, or other states in and around the region.

Is there hope for a "red" New Jersey? I believe there is, with New Jersey not Democrat by super-margins as in New York state, a competitive nature that Republican candidates are able to muster in the state, good voter registration drives, and working at dissatisfied Democrats, the Republican party could one day become the leading party in Jersey, although I don't see that happening overnight.

As a person working in education and a former school student I have to say that this is one of the dumbest requests I've heard in at least a week. President Obama looks like he will bow to the radical left-wing of the Education lobby and may increase not only the school day, but also the length of the school year.

And of course the Education Secretary believes that those damn rural students are dragging us down:

"Our school calendar is based upon the agrarian economy and not too many of our kids are working the fields today," Education Secretary Arne Duncan said in a recent interview with The Associated Press.

How about instead of overworking teachers and students and creating a large disservice for school districts and parents we actually work to reform the current system. In current schools, grades are slowly being marginalized, school curriculums not based as much on achievements, and teachers are often overworked.

How about making it easier to become a teacher to include people with Master's Degrees without certification? How about breaking the major Unions into smaller organization, just like the government breaks up business monopolies.

How about cutting back on left-wing indoctrination instead of adding in more time. If you simply reduce the time in which teachers will teach students that the Japanese internment camps were equivalent to the Holocaust, you could get a lot of time.

Sunday, September 27, 2009

Germany's Chancellor claims victory The voters of Germany have handed Chancellor a second time in office, a historic victory for center-right political parties in the Nation, a slap in the face towards terrorists who had threatened Germany with terrorist attacks, in an attempt to win the election for the leftist candidate, and for once in the history of Germany, a pro-business coalition.

While the official results are not in, Merkel is the re-elected Chancellor in the Nation of Germany, her plans for tax cuts, and keeping nuclear power active in the Nation will move forward, an pro-war on terrorism Germany will continue, and Conservatives have just had their best finish in Germany ever.

Great news from Germany, may it spread to the United States.

Israel tells United States : time to act on Iran.Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu met with Nancy Pelosi & various United States Senates, and urged them to take action against Iran, although the "action" was never specified. This news comes out at we are leaning that Iran fired several short range missiles, and is planning to fire a long range missile which has the range to strike Israel.

I believe Israel and the United States have the obligation to act now, to destroy the nuclear sites in Iran, and to end the terrorist threat from Iran once and for all, bomb the Presidential palace, and be done with it.

This is no time to run to the United Nations for eight resolutions, we need to take direct action now, or else......who knows what could occur down the road, with a nuclear armed Iran. If the United States government is cowardice, then Israel must do it on their own, and soon.

Side note : Merkel is also a fairly Pro-Israeli head of state, considering Merkel is from the Nation of Germany, which once murdered six million Jews. However, she has stood against the Iranian despot in the past, stronger then Obama ever will, sadly.

Little Green Footballs, once one of the highest regarded Conservative blogs on the entire Internet, has devolved into one of the most vile anti-Conservative blogs on the entire Internet, as the website apparently devotes itself to spearing right-wing pundits, lawmakers, fellow bloggers, and the ideals which Conservatives hold dear.

Over the past few weeks alone, Little Green Footballs has attacked Congressman Roy Blunt as a racist, which has been disproved by numerous sources, even the New York Times did not buy into the racist claims against Congressman Blunt, then Little Green Footballs attacked Senator Jim Inhofe for opposing global warming, for stirring up opposition to the global warming conference in Denmark, and for "subverting the Obama administrations policies overseas", from those statements, it appears that Little Green Footballs thinks that Conservatives should not oppose the "global warming myth", that we should not be talking at these conferences, and that we should not attempting to subvert Obama's agenda overseas.

Nancy Pelosi met with the Syria leader during the Bush administration, Senator Boxer was at the same global warming conference several years ago - the same one that Senator Inhofe was at, and liberal Democrats have done far more to "subvert" Bush era policies, then Conservatives ever have or will overseas.

However, when a Conservative wants to bring the anti-global warming side to the table in Denmark, he is dubbed a "traitor" by Little Green Footballs, don't take my word for it, visit the disgusting website.

Little Green Footballs also has a distaste for Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann, Governor Rick Perry, Conservative talk show host Glenn Beck, Conservative blogger R.S. McCain, those who attended the tea party protests, pro-lifers, creationists, and pretty much every other Conservative ideal under the sun. However, if the website just wrote about foreign policy, and nothing else, the website would earn respect back.

Little Green Footballs has become a growing enemy of Conservatism in the United States blogosphere, is my blog or R.S. McCain's blog the solution? Probably not, however, Little Green Footballs is an ever growing problem, as the war between blogs continues, rifts among Conservatives are growing, while our interests should be dedicated to fighting Obama.

What is the solution? Ignore them. Focus on what counts. Don't give the Conservative basher the light of day.

I was looking up Vermont politics this afternoon, to ponder how awful it is for Republicans in the state that has elected a self-avowed socialist to the United States Senate, however, when looking over representation in the Vermont House of Representatives, I received the shock of my life. Let me explain this in numbers.

The New York State Assembly has 150 seats, as does Vermont, 41 Republicans are in the State Assembly, and the Democrats have a coalition of 108 representatives (one seat is vacant, a Democrat resigned due to defrauding the public, 108 to go). That equals to just 27.5% of all representatives in the New York State Assembly are Republicans.

In Massachusetts, just to make a fair comparison, they have 160 seats in the Massachusetts House of Representatives, though ten more then Vermont & New York, the point is still legit, Massachusetts has just 16 Republicans in their House of Representatives, and only 21 Republicans combined in the entire State legislature.

As for Vermont, one of the most liberal states in the United States electorate, a state which has elected socialists, a progressive third party with representatives in the state legislature, they have 47 Republicans elected, would be 48....however one of them resigned his seat to take a better position in the Vermont government., or 32% of Vermont representatives are Republicans.

What the hell? Vermont has more elected Republicans in their state House of Representatives (the State Senate is another discussion) then the states of New York & Massachusetts, where Republicans do better in statewide & national elections, what are we missing in New York?

Please, someone answer this question for me, why does Vermont have more elected Republicans in their State Assembly, then New York state! A state that does not (publicly) have a self-avowed socialist representing them!

I should be pleased, atleast Vermont has a Republican Governor, but Vermont is doing better with Republicans & Conservatism then New York state? Something just feels off.

Saturday, September 26, 2009

The fight to secure the southern border has been a long one, as with a viable national security and millions of criminal trespassers coming as they please, the southern border has been in need of complete shutdown (not at border entrances, along the American border where illegals enter), ultimate security from the Border Patrol, and support from both major political parties.

While the Republican party can be dubbed the party of border security among the vast majority of Republican lawmakers in Congress (and may God bless them), we have numerous Republicans who have stabbed the American people in the back over the border, including Senator John McCain whom I deeply respect, and President George W. Bush who I hold as the greatest President during my lifetime.

However, President Bush did increase Border Patrol levels on the southern border, and he commuted the sentences of two border patrol agents who we're charged for doing their job.

We no longer have President Bush in the White House, we now have Barack Obama, and our border security is even more in risk then it was before.

As reported by CNSNews, the Obama administration is pulling close to 400 border patrol agents away from the southern border (where they are needed) and deploying them to the northern border, when I don't see any really need for them. Especially since only 33% of the southern border is successfully protected, three persons linked to terrorism we're caught attempting enter the United States last year.

So, Obama's policy on the southern border, remove needed Agents from the most needed place, and transfer them to Canada? Is the Canadian border more dangerous? No, the southern border is where terrorists, illegals, criminals, and trespassers alike attempt to enter the United States illegally, not Canada!

Pathetic.

We need more border agents on the southern border, to protect every inch of the border, as well as that fence that should have been built several years ago, not the continued Obama policy of wussification of our entire national security.

Friday, September 25, 2009

For years the mantra of the Left was that continuing to fight in Iraq would embolden terrorists and that reversing Bush-era policies would help ease al Qaeda's 'concerns.' Guantanamo Bay prison is on its way to being closed. Fighting has nearly ceased in Iraq and troops are being pulled out. Obama lauded the Muslim world in a Cairo speech.

And in less than a month, five possible plots to attack the United States have been uncovered.

The most famous was the case of Najibullah Zazi and his al Qaeda-linked cell. These alleged terrorists were planning possible attacks on the New York City subway and perhaps on other targets. Even though Zazi is in custody, his cell might still be seeking to attack.

Next, a Jordanian man was arrested after attempting to plant what he thought was a car bomb in downtown Dallas. I hope that this becomes big news, cause it sure is scary. This car bomb, by the way, was placed at the base of a 60-story skyscraper.

Next we have suspicious men possibly casing a Philadelphia subway. This is also scary news, as the men have fled.

And two of the seven men accused of trying to go overseas to help fight a jihad against the United States were attempting to launch an attack in Virginia. They were planning to attack a Marine base, and it sure sounds scary:

It offered no details, except to say that Boyd had undertaken reconnaissance of Quantico and obtained maps of the base in order to plan the attack.

The U.S. Attorney's Office said Boyd also possessed armor piercing ammunition, and had stated that it was "to attack the Americans."

Last, we have a man held today for attempting to blow up a federal building in Chicago. The man was a convert to Islam and would have launched an imminent attack:

He was introduced to an undercover FBI agent who began working with him to plot an attack, but Finton was repeatedly told he could walk away at any time, according to the Justice Department.

Eventually, Finton picked the federal building in Springfield as the target and on Wednesday he parked a van he believed carried one ton of explosives at the location, the complaint said.

Obama's weakness on foreign affairs has already damaged this country. And now not one, but five separate attempts to murder Americans have been uncovered in short succession. If terrorists really believed that the United States was now a peaceful utopia, why would they be planning new massacres.

President Obama, listen up: you must deal with these people. Drop bombs on them or shoot them. Al Qaeda cannot be quenched without American and Jewish blood. Take them out before they take us out.

Thursday, September 24, 2009

Glenn Beck, a Conservative talk show host who I have become a fan of over the past several years, was on Katie Couric's CBS television show the other night, and he had the audacity to say that John McCain would have been twice as worse as Barack Obama, if elected into the Oval office, and that he would consider voting for Hillary Clinton over John McCain!

Excuse me?

John McCain had his many flaws, I disagreed with him on numerous issues, however, I agreed with McCain nearly 70-80% of the time on all issues (according to various "who do you agree with most" political surveys on the Internet, I was of course more Conservative), he has a 82% Conservative rating from the American Conservative Union, and he was the only man for the job in terms of foreign policy.

John McCain is great on foreign policy, most economic policy, on pro-life issues, on wasteful spending he is excellent, and he is a strong man, something that Obama is not. While McCain is awful on numerous issues, I would rather take the man who will do good 70-80% of the time, then someone who does bad 100% of the time.

So Glenn Beck, you would rather Van Jones, ACORN scandals, growing government, wasteful spending, the wussification of our foreign policy, more death via abortion, and the pushing of socialized medicine down our throats, not to mention liberal appointments to the Supreme Court? I think not, so John McCain would have been twice as worse?

Also, Theodore Roosevelt was horrible on the size & scope of government, he was a progressive, but when Republicans & Conservatives praise Teddy Roosevelt, we think of his brilliant history as a war hero, something that all Americans admire, that is what McCain meant went comparing himself to that.

I would support John McCain everyday to Sunday against Obama, Clinton, Edwards, Kerry, Gore, Dean, Dukakis, and every other liberal Democrat you can throw at me, because that 70% of Conservatism (while I would rather 100% Conservatism) is better then 0% Conservatism, every day of the week.

I hate having to write this. Israel, you have a decision that has to be made rather quickly, do you want to eliminate the terrorist nuclear threat in Iran, or do you want to become a land of burnt rubbish? That is your choice, and that decision needs to be made now.

Iran is moving full speed ahead with their nuclear ambitions, the United States is becoming even more weak assed each and everyday under the Obama administration, you have cleared a path to Iran to bomb them, even receiving an O.K. from Saudi Arabia to fly through their airspace, and with a mounting threat, plus every Nation in the world opposed to Israeli interests, except for the citizens of Israel, the time is now to act.

This is the do or die moment for the Nation of Israel, a Nation which has withstood hell and fury over the past 5,000 years, but has remained a strong Nation never the less, with a strong belief in God almighty, and power friends such as the United States. Israel has seen many wars in the past six decades, however, Israel has won almost all of them, and I am certain a war against Iran would not be much different.

Israel, Obama is destroying American foreign policy, there is no guarantee that Israel would ever receive aid from the United States during an attack against Israel, or the possible war which would ensue afterwards, from an American standpoint, you would think America would be in this as well, considering Iran is an evil, is a threat to all Nations of freedom, and that Iran has paid for weapons & terrorists who have killed American soldiers in Iraq & Afghanistan.

We should be fighting this together, however, with Israel standing alone, Iran continuing their path towards nuclear weapons, and with the clock ticking, it is time to act Israel, it is time to do or die.

Wednesday, September 23, 2009

With respect to all Republicans, 70% of the Republican party are self acclaimed Conservatives, with a 30% gap of Libertarians, moderates, and even some full blown Liberal Republicans. We are a party that is as diverse as our roots are historic, we are a party with numerous beliefs from numerous sectors of the American political landscape, so what to do with Libertarians and the Republican party?

That is the question that haunts Conservatives, Libertarians, and die in the wool Republicans all at the same time, as some of us fear what will occur if the party becomes to Libertarian, yet we all fear what will happen if the party becomes to Liberal, that should be one fact that brings all Republicans together, we must be the stead fast opposition to liberalism, with Conservatism & right leaning beliefs. I think we can agree with that, but what divides us, and how can we mend a bridge?

We are divided for numerous reasons, one of the largest is social issues, as Conservatives believes in life for the unborn, and we believe that marriage is a sacred union between one man and one woman, and that the government should be forcing the definition to change. On the issue of foreign policy, we become even more divided, as Libertarians tend to be against all measures we have taken to fight the war on terror, and even oppose the war on terror itself, the problem there, is that the war on a terror is not a issue that can be bridged, you are either for it or against it.

We do have Libertarian Republicans who are for a strong National defense, such as the "Libertarian Republican" a prominent Libertarian Republican blog, which originated as a "Libertarians for Bush effort", while we accept their strong beliefs in an important area such as National defense, we are still divided by other forces.

How can Libertarians, Conservatives, Republicans, and yes....even some Moderates mend the bridges that divide us all, to form one strong Republican party opposed to liberalism & the Democrat party 100% of the time? Economics. While we will fight on social issues & foreign policy for hours upon hours, we agree with the principles of a free market system, of low taxes, of competition, of free trade, of balanced budgets, against pork spending, and for lowering the National deficit & debt.

Thus, we have one common goal, principle, and belief system - Capitalism. With the current times being as are in Washington D.C., that is the one issue that needs to unite us all, we need to be devoted to Capitalism & economic liberty, while a strong foreign policy must be included for any Republican to bridge any gap, a strong focus on free market principles is needed to seal the deal among all Republicans.

I am a Conservative, I will never apologize for that, I am a Republican, who is devoted to the cause & party, it is time that Conservatives & Libertarians join on issues of joint interests, while leaving the issues we disagree with to the core principles of Conservatism, that is something that is non-negotiable. Join on what we agree, and let be what we disagree on.

Canada, who participated in the D-Day landings in Normandy in 1944 now has another great moment in foreign policy. Our northern neighbor, usually seen as restrained and friendly, has now adopted a stronger anti-Iran approach than the United States.

That's right-- Canada has informed its delegates to the United Nations to boycott Iranian "President" Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's speech today. All of the other nations except for Israel are expected to be here, but Canada is setting an excellent precedent for all of us to follow.

In other good news, Germany has stated that it will walk out of Ahmadinejad's speech if he again says that the Holocaust never happened. This is also a firm stance. Not as good as Canada, but good nonetheless.

Which brings us to America. Obama is planning to.... to....

Speak and have the US delegates listen to Ahmadinejad's speech.

Not to mention that Iran is building nuclear weapons.

Not to mention that Iran is threatening to destroy Israel.

Not to mention that Iran is killing American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Not to mention that Iran rigged its last election and killed dozens of protestors.

This might come across as a strange question for those on the left and the right. On the left, he was seen as a transcending figure whose popularity was due to America's sudden shift to "progressive values." Yeah right. To conservatives, it was a sign that a lot of Americans really didn't know what was going on.

But there are factors to show that Obama was perhaps less popular than Al Gore, John Kerry, or even George W. Bush in the 2008 election.

Factors:

1.Bush was very unpopular, and Obama couldn't even reach 55%.

Take a look at Bush's approval ratings. Around election time in 2008, he was lucky if one pollster placed him above the 40% mark. Not to mention that about 60% of the nation disapproved. Under these circumstances, Obama should have easily peeled off those that disapproved-- instead he faced a tough fight among members of his own party.

2. McCain was disliked by many conservatives. Many stayed home.

The winner of the 2008 Republican nomination was someone who was demonized worse within his own party than by the Democrats. Hundreds of thousands of conservative and libertarian voters stayed home due to this fact. Would they have swung the election the other way? Probably not. But swinging a couple of states and reducing the margin from 7% to 4% would show the lack of Obama's true popularity. Keep in mind that voter turnout declined in 2008.

3. Obama's celebrity status couldn't even make him popular.

Obama was lauded for commanded millions of followers, and getting over 500,000 people to listen to a speech in Berlin. For all of this, Americans largely stayed immune to the celebrity bug. Despite showing up on SNL, the Daily Show, Leno, Letterman, and WSJF's Billing's Model Railroad Hour, Obama gained little traction among those not already disposed to him.

4. Many, if not most, of the Obama supporters never entered the real world.

Look at who Obama's top supporters were: college students, professors, and union hacks. Many of these are used to hefty praise and things handed to them. It was only too popular to support Obama and put up that trendy "change" poster in your room. Yeah, you don't pay taxes or ever voted before, but he was on Jon Stewart! (see #3)

If Bush's approval rating was 45% and McCain hammered on Reverend Wright, we would probably have a different President. So much for Obama's popularity.

Tuesday, September 22, 2009

Senator Robert Byrd, the number one reason for term limits in the United States Congress (first elected in 1958 to the United States Senate, still in office today), has not been a full time Senator representing West Virginia for literally years, as his health continues to decline, it is about time that Byrd retire from the United States Senate.

It is being reported that Byrd has been admitted to the hospital in northern Virginia, after a fall in his home earlier this day, http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/27429.html , another reason by Byrd should retire, I cannot count a long stretch where he has been active in the Senate.

Byrd is a liberal democrat racist, a former klansman of the highest degree, literally, he is a porker & wasteful Senator in terms of economics, and is a fine example of why we need term limits, because no-one should serve as a United States Senator for over five decades, and shame on West Virginia for ever electing someone for five decades.

So, I hereby call for Senator Robert Byrd, to retire from the United States Senate, to end his reign of power, to restore a full sitting (hopefully Republican) Senator to represent West Virginia, and to just get the hell out of office, it is long overdue.

ACORN, that criminal organization that has been exposed for voter registration fraud, giving undercover journalists advice & support to run an illegal underage girl sex operation in several cities across the United States, its radical connections & belief systems, the tens of millions of dollars the organization has received through federal & statewide legislation, not to mention that inconvenient truth that Obama and this organization have close past connections.

ACORN also has several minor political parties across the United States.

Hold on a second, you did not know about ACORN having several political parties across the United States? This is a vital issue that we must tell everyone about.

Unless you are involved in New York politics, or you have completed a hell of a lot political research on the Internet, you would not that ACORN has five political parties in action across the United States, heavily focused in New York & Connecticut, but also has smaller parties in Delaware, Oregon, and South Carolina.

Back in 1998, the "working families party" was created in the state of New York, formed by ACORN and other groups, however, ACORN is running the political puppet that is the "working families party". The group is a 100% socialist party, which is committed to pushing Democrats farther to the left, which is laughable, as how could they become even more liberal then they are now?

One of the first campaigns the party worked for, was Hillary Clinton's 2000 bid for the United States Senate seat, the party brought 100,000 votes to Clinton's campaign, she worked closely with them, via the cross-endorsement of candidates in the New York electoral system. The party has grown to 30,000 card carrying voters in New York, they are also spreading to other states as well, especially in Connecticut where two members have been elected to the Hartford city council, and one member is in the New York Assembly.

The New York branch of the ACORN connected parties is as corrupt as ACORN itself, because it is ACORN.

The working families party in New York has Bertha Lewis as a co-chair, very interesting since she is the national CEO of ACORN, not to mention the working families & ACORN headquarters are located at the exact same address in New York City. Now that a connection is 100% known between the two, not to mention the goals are one of the same, the New York branch has been exposed for committing illegal acts.

As exposed by the New York Post, a private company has been used by the working families party to illegally steer labor-union resources to its favored candidates, they have also missed two financial disclosure deadlines to the Board of Elections in New York. Don't expect a New York Times article on the story, as they have endorsed seven ACORN/working families candidates in New York City elections.

ACORN is a corrupt, criminal organization which should have never received a dime in taxpayer money in the first place, however, they do not have to depend on the Democrats to be corrupt, when they have their own mini-parties growing up across America. Next time you see a candidate under the working family/ACORN party label, I would avoid that candidates at all costs.

ACORN is spreading its corruption, now into our electoral system as well, God help us if they create their own nationwide political party, the corruption in American politics would skyrocket, and the criminal organization would be given more credibility & power.

We must fight the Democrats, however, we must also fight ACORN at all levels, especially at the electoral level.

Rasmussen Reports has just released a new approval/disapproval poll from the late great state of Minnesota, a state which has elected Jesse Ventura and Al Franken into statewide & federal offices, perhaps the two largest disgraces to elected office in history. Anyhow, polling data does not go well for Senator Franken, who is entering his third month in the United States Senate, after ballots mysteriously we're found to give him the edge over Republican Senator Norm Coleman.

The polling data is not good for Franken, as he has to be the least liked new Senator in the United States of America, no doubt about it.

41% rate Franken as a excellent or good Senator.54% rate Franken as a fair/poor Senator.5% are not sure how to rate Franken as a Senator.

Keep in mind, Governor Tim Pawlently, a fellow Republican, has a 56% approval rating, as does the other Democrat Senator from Minnesota, meaning the folks of Minnesota just do not like what they are seeing, especially with this creep.

While I believe Franken illegally won the Senate election in 2008, especially through the recount, I feel the voters of Minnesota are to blame, for even allowing such an idiot to get over 40% of the vote in the first place, and allowing him anywhere near victory! I hope they regret it, so as I placed in the title of this blogpost, Norm Coleman 2014? I could see any Republican candidate with a great chance to throw off this idiot in 2014.

Monday, September 21, 2009

While Conservatives, Republicans, hell, Americans are starting to mobilize 100% against Obama's agenda, for the 2010 mid-term elections in the House & Senate, not to mention fight back against his government takeover of health care, the auto industry, and union legislation, what are Conservative bloggers doing? That is the question of the night, what is the Conservative blogosphere doing in late September, as we are coming ever so close to stopping Obama's radical agenda, winning the Gubernatorial elections in Virginia & New Jersey, and who knows.....perhaps a congressional win or two on election day (special congressional elections will be held in New York & California at or around election day), so about those Conservative bloggers?

Currently, the blogosphere is in the middle of a monster huge battle of the blogs between Little Green Footballs and the entire Conservative blogosphere, I have mostly remained silent, as though my fellow bloggers have linked this site (I just write on this site, the own and operate) to LGF, I am silently their largest critic, and the largest supporter of R.S. McCain in his battle against the smears of a so called Conservative blog.

While we have new developments of Obama big government plans entering the fray every single day, we have Conservative blogs, valuable blogs who's time is better spent working against liberals & Obama, are fighting against a fellow supposed Conservative blogger who appears to represent nothing Conservative. He is anti-social conservatism, anti-tea party movement, a flat out liar, and mis-represents the truth in all that he sees.

What is the solution to this evergrowing annoyance? When a loudmouth liberal, who will not learn despite your greatest efforts, will not leave you alone, what do you do? You ignore them, I suggest that we do the same. Ignore LGF, ignore Charles Johnson, stand up for real Conservatives whom he has smeared over the past several weeks.

Authors note : While Congressman Murphy did vote to cut off Federal funding to ACORN, he gladly accepted the ACORN associated "Working Families party" endorsement during the 2009 special election.

On march 31st, Democrat Scott Murphy defeated former New York Assembly Minority leader,Republican Jim Tedisco by just over 700 votes in a special congressional election to replace Congresswoman Kirsten Gillibrand, who was recently appointed to the United States Senate by Governor Paterson. That special election yielded the closest election in the 20th congressional district in years, perhaps signaling a return to prominence by Republicans in the district.

Tedisco ran a campaign based on fiscal conservatism, social conservatism, and his experience in Albany. While defeat was the end result, his campaign was successful in bringing Republican voters out to the polls, something the previous Republican candidate lacked during the 2008 congressional election, however, I feel it Tedisco targeted Otsego county more, he would have won that election.

What has changed from the special election in the beginning of Spring, to the legislative session in late Summer? Scott Murphy has been in the United States Congress for several months now, and his record is horrific. Then again, voters should have realized the truth about Murphy on election day, as he supported the stimulus package while claiming to be a "fiscal conservative", legislation which has added billions to our debt, has done nothing but waste billions of dollars to liberal special interests, has added on to our unemployment rate, and has done absolutely nothing to help the economy, as Capitalist economists & past history predicted.

Murphy has been a tool for Nancy Pelosi over these past several months, as his record includes voting for the massive "cap & tax", supporting Obama's radical health care plans, voted for the government takeover of student loans, and has 87% of the time voted with the Democratic agenda. This is not what the voters in the 20th congressional district wanted, and that is what Jim Tedisco can capitalize on in November 2010. As besides for his advocacy for recall, initiative, and referendum electoral reform in the state of New York, Tedisco has been very quiet, which might work to his benefit.

It was apparent last week that his hopes & aspirations include a position in the United States Congress, when the "friends of Jim Tedisco", sent an email to me & thousands of other citizens, focused primarily on his thoughts on current issues that relate only to the Nation as a whole, not one word about legislation or news from New York, it focused 100% on Nationwide base issues & news. Mainly against legislation & goals which Murphy & Democrats alike, hold. Tedisco has a good campaign staff, a easy primary if he decides to run, and an almost guarantee of the Conservative party endorsement, among three other crucial factors on his side.

1.Tedisco is a Conservative, Murphy is a Liberal - the Nation is shifting rapidly back towards Conservatism, favoring Republican candidates.

2.Murphy is a pawn of Nancy Pelosi, Tedisco is not - Americans do not like Pelosi, they just cannot relate to a snobby liberal from San Francisco.

3.Murphy supports cap & tax, a health care government takeover, massive Obama budgets, and is associated with Obama. Tedisco is none of the above, is associated with the National Rifle Association, Business organizations, and pro-life organizations.

Larry Sabato has 20-30 seats moving into Republican control in 2010, I believe the 20th congressional district could move into Republican control, under Tedisco 2010.

"If you can't handle the heat, get out of the kitchen".That best describes New York politics at its best, a political arena which is brutal even on a good day, as to be a Republican is harsh, being a Conservative Republican on top of that, is pure hell in this state, unless you reside in one of twenty-something counties which voted for John McCain last November. We have a very interesting Gubernatorial election next November, with Rudy Giuliani, Rick Lazio, David Paterson, and other supporting actors *cough candidates cough* in the running for the Governor's mansion, not to mention a very important special congressional election in the 23rd district of New York this November upcoming.

So what does Barack Obama got to do with any of this?

Barack Obama & White House has kept all major Primary opponents against Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, out of the race.

Barack Obama & White House have advised Governor Paterson not to run for the Democrat nomination in 2010, which did not "jive" with Paterson.

It is reported that Rham Emanuel, who serves in the White House, was deeply involved in the selection of Congressman McHugh as Secretary of Army, intentionally exposing a historic GOP election to Democrat hands.

For someone who is the President of the United States, it appears he is involved in New York has a political consultant, more then the President, that is just my opinion.

As a Conservative Republican, I realize New York has problems, however, New York still has the chance to actually elect Republicans who can do something about it, we have good candidates for the 2010 elections, and the last thing we need is Obama & Rham Emanuel sticking their noses into our business.

Thursday, September 17, 2009

The latest poll results from the upcoming New Hampshire Senate election between Republican Kelly Ayotte and Democrat Paul Hodes showcase that Ayotte is leading Hodes by a healthy 46-38% margin, Ayotte announced her candidacy several months ago, and has gained steam among Republicans in the Granite state. While Ayotte is a bright young Republican, who served as Attorney General in New Hampshire before resigning to lay out her campaign, she has rallied the base of the party, and is looking good to retain the Senate seat that Judd Gregg will leave next year.

I previously documented how Aurora Republican Councilman Ryan Frazier was leading the Democrat Senator early on the upcoming Colorado Senate election, we have new results which show that the former Republican Lt.Governor Jane Norton leading Democrat Michael Bennet by an impressive 45-36% margin, Norton also leads the former Democrat House speaker by a 42-34% margin as well, proving that dislike for Democrats in Colorado is for all candidates.

Here we have two important Senate battleground states in the 2010 elections, both with strong Republican women as probable candidates (Ayotte is definite, Norton is not), beating the snot out of the Democrat opposition, plus I noted the other day that Reid is also doing miserable in Nevada as well, not to mention Rudy Giuliani would have a good shot at defeating Gillibrand in New York state.

I have written numerous times on how Obama & National security are and never will be friends in any demeanor, he is a pacifist liberal jackass, and if he could leave Afghanistan & Iraq today, he would.......

Obama has just made another idiotic National security mistake, or should I say another way to 100% piss off our last European allies which actually give a damn about security, as Obama is sending officials in the Czech Republic & Poland to tell them that the missile defense system promised under the Bush administration, will be scrapped.

How this just pisses me off in so many ways, not to mention makes absolutely no sense to someone who is as worried about National security then me, as I care very deeply about the lives of Americans and our allies overseas, as there is real evil and real danger out in the world, and you must take all precautions to defend your Nation & alliance, not to leave a giant insecurity hole for a missile to fly right through into Poland!

The reasons for missile defense is endless, all I know is that we need it, the liberal folks of Hawaii really wanted it after North Korea threatened to attack, I thought that would teach the Obama administration something about National security, I guess I was wrong.

The Obama administration - still wrong, still weak, still putting American lives at risk, not to mention our allies lives as well.

Wednesday, September 16, 2009

Tuesday, September 15, 2009

Several months ago, Democrat Senator Zell Miller (more like a Republican) was speaking at a event, and he said that Rham Emanuel needs to put gorilla glue on the Presidents chair, to keep him from flying all over the world at taxpayer expense. I loved the humor, and heard no racism, unlike our ideological counterparts.......who see racism in everything.

I would like to use Senator Miller's analogy on the current situation, as Obama is criss-crossing the Mid-west making speeches at union thug headquarters, is going on another late night television show (George Washington, Abe Lincoln, JFK rolling in graves over the lowering of the most powerful office in the world), and is appearing on all Sunday morning shows, except for Chris Wallace on FoxNews.

Obama is going around the Nation, to union pet peeves, wasting American taxpayer dollars as he makes another several speeches, which has had to have reached well over 200, I could not imagine it below 100, he is wasting our time, he is clogging our airwaves, and his message is as stale as peanuts on a Southwestern flight.

Obama - we cannot afford to waste or spend even more money, that goes for all in government, and since you are using taxpayer dollars as your personal frequent flyer milers, STOP IT.

I just love political pundits, as whether they are on the Conservative or liberal side of the political spectrum, they are always attempting to rally the base, calling for Americans to stand up, to be action, however, the call to action byway of running for elected office is hardly mentioned. I am a Evangelical Conservative Republican from the mountains of Upstate New York, I have over the past eight or nine months become very political active, and I am planting the seeds to run for office in either November 2011 or Spring of 2012.

What bothers me, is that the pundits support dedicated action, which I am apart of as an National Rifle Association member, however, the call to be citizen legislators is often ignored. Take New York State for instance, there are literally tens of thousands of elected offices one can run for, even in one of the least populous counties there are close to 150 elected positions and that is just one county. Imagine if 200 Conservative Republicans stood up and decided to run & won elected offices across the state, that would be a dramatic change across the state.

Working in & with political campaigns is important, voting is crucial, and joining political organizations with likewise beliefs is all apart of being a politically active Conservative Republican. One must also remember, there is also a time to declare yourself a candidate, and run on what you believe. Because we not only need Conservatives making political phonecalls for campaigns, we need them making the decisions in elected office.

So my message would be to Conservative Republicans & Republicans in general across the United States, to RUN!

Yesterday we got the triumphant news that the United States Senate had decided to cut off funds to the "community activist" group ACORN. ACORN, of course is known primarily for organizing voter fraud and assisting in prostitution. It must also be noted that the group played a role in the banking collapse, forcing banks to loan millions in subprime mortgages in order to avoid being called 'racist.'

By an overwhelming, bipartisan vote of 83-7, the Senate barred funding for the group, which has received millions in federal and state funding. Among the yes votes are many prominent liberal Democrats, who may have supported ACORN in the past. Even President Obama once worked for an affiliate of the organization.

Which brings us to Kirsten Gillibrand, who was appointed Senator this year after Secretary of State Hillary Clinton resigned her Senate seat. Appointed by an unpopular governor, she ruffled the feathers of left and right. Left for formerly supporting gun rights and other "right wing" causes and by the Right for abandoning her "core beliefs" once she wanted the Senate seat.

So she comes in with a low approval and now votes in favor of stuffing ACORN with more money. After they committed voter fraud and after these videos have been released.

And now there's word that former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani may run against Gillibrand for her Senate seat. If that's the case, she better start making better decisions than giving money to these crooks.

Monday, September 14, 2009

The Daily Kos is known for doing their own polling (in cooperation with Research 2000) and coming uo with misleading results. For example, their equivalent of "Do you believe that President Obama is doing a good job as President" is "Do you think President Obama is a nice person." It might provide results for the second question, but it is prominently placed near the top of the site as his 'approval.'

ABC and CBS (especially the latter) have become infamous for their misleading poll results. Often, they placed Obama's polls during his run at 5% over others-- because they played hooky with statistics. CBS would intentionally "oversample" black Americans by 10% for th poll, thus pushing up Obama's numbers.

The most accurate of all of the polls has been Rasmussen, which almost pegged the last two Presidential races exactly.

But CNN, which is usually fairly accurate, came out with a strange figure today.

According to the latest CNN Research Dynamics poll, President Obama's approval has spiked to 58%. While this may seem plausible due to his primetime speech, it also appears unlikely due to simple statistical means. The average of all of the other polls on RealClearPolitics was 52.0%. This would mean that CNN's poll would be 6% higher, or well out of the statistical margin of error. In addition, his disapproval was at 40%, or 9% lower than Rasmussen's 49.

Rasmussen, which polls likely voters, and not just all adults, has been the most accurate. They placed the approval at 50% earlier today. In addition, a recent Zogby poll had Obama at 42%-- 14% lower than CNN.

Also, in a poll taken from September 11-13, there is a noticable absence of questions relating to the day or the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Perhaps a few of these questions would remind citizens what a subpar job the President's Administration is doing at protecting this country.

In the future, just check out Rasmussen-- they're most accurate and the founder is on Fox a lot.

With news reports that Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine) is now opposed to all forms of government run health care and a "trigger" government run health care, giving the Republicans 39 stronghold votes against the current government run option plan in the House of Representatives. It is also being reported, that Senator Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) is warning Obama that the government run option needs to go.

Adding Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-Arkansas) opposition to the current legislation, and the borderline opposition by Senator Joe Lieberman (I-Connecticut), it gives the opposition 40-42 guaranteed votes against the current government run option in the House of Representatives, with the Democrats clinging to a 59 seats in the Senate, it means the Democrats are screwed in the United States Senate.

As for the United States House of Representatives, I would guarantee that all 178 Republicans are opposed to H.R. 3200, and that anywhere from 28-44 Democrats are opposed to the plan as well, giving the opposition good ranks in both houses of Congress.

Hopefully, when the day comes for the big vote, it fails by even larger margins in the House of Representatives, because the Senate is always "iffy".

Does Barack Obama have a brain in regards to National security? I suspect some will call me an idiot or a moron, but this question needs to be asked.

Obama is now pushing at the United Nations, that we take steps to get rid of all Nuclear weapons through out the world, which would be a horrible mistake for all Nations of good & freedom. There is one key aspect of American & Israeli foreign policy which should always remain, that the United States & Israel always have nuclear weapons, and that all other Nations must not.

Liberals will read the above and delve into some utopia dream of a world without nuclear weapons, if you think about, having nuclear weapons prevented a massive third world war between the United States & Russia. However, lets remember.........nuclear weapons like any weapon is a weapon of good, until evil gets hold of it. With that added reality, we must always realize that evil will always possess nuclear weapons, and thus it is the responsibility of Nations of good (Israel, United States, Britain) to have these weapons as well.

Even if no other Nation in the world had these weapons, America must always have them, it is the ultimate piece of leverage, and it is one we cannot afford to barter way in liberal utopia stupidity. As we must take all measures to secure our National security.

So, does Obama have a brain in regards to nuclear weapons? Nope.

Does the United States Senate to prevent a possible treaty? As of now, Yes.

From the network which brings you Countdown with Keith Olbermann and the viewerless Ed Schultz Crap-O-Rama, we get this very interesting piece of news. Plastered bright and loud on the front of the MSNBC website, we're able to see something which would normally get you called a liar-- or a racist.

The venerable news organization is telling us that if the famed ObamaCare package is rushed through Congress, there may be a doctor shortage-- which would lead to rationing-- Which would basically be what has been criticized all along.

You liars.

Basically, the long and the short of it (about a month too late) is that doctors are already overworked and adding 50 million people on the rolls abruptly will wind overloading the system. And if you add people who get health coverage for free/almost free they might take advantage and start acting like hypochondriacs, shutting out other patients.

Now I know that the Dems like big labor, but what will they do if doctors go on strike, leading to days or week of lacking coverage? Will they support it due to its strike rights, or criticize the lack of coverage for millions of Americans?

I know, the revelation came as a shock to me too. I admit it: you're all racists. Me too-- I didn't even know it. I had an inkling of it before, but your latest questioning of the President cemented in my mind the indelible fact that you are a racist.

Saturday, September 12, 2009

Leave me a comment on this, please? I think that it's a great point-- and if it makes sense, email it out, please.

Okay-- imagine that the week after the worst terrorist attack in world history, in which almost 3,000 of your countreymen were murdered you were in church and the pastor began telling the parishioners that the United States brought it on itself. That we deserved it. That America deserved to be damned by God.

Imagine he's saying this, complete with foul language, in front of your young children. He's saying that your country deserved the vicious assault and that your countrymen just got in the way.

Wouldn't you punch that pompous asshole in the face?

I'm not being sarcastic here. If you were in church and you heard that from the pulpit, wouldn't you calmly get up, roll up your sleeves and punch him over the altar?

Or at least walk out?

Why didn't then-State Senator Barack Obama do this to Reverend Jeremiah Wright? He would have been hailed as a hero and had the self-satisfaction of sticking up for the murdered. Why didn't he at least gather up his family, give the preacher the finger and walk out, never to return again?

Or at least demand an apology?

Yet Obama did none of that. Instead, he mumbled some comments to the news about how we had to understand the al Qaeda terrorists and how poverty was partly to blame.

So once again, and I'm asking you the reader to answer and get your friends and family to answer:

Friday, September 11, 2009

Something that has pissed me off since the first time was the question, "Didn't you know 9/11 was an inside job?" It was asked to me by a friend, who then showed me part of the famously idiotic "Loose Change," which proposes that September 11, 2001 was an attack on the White House and Pentagon, not by terrorists, but by our very own government and a host of engineers.

I was about 15 at the time; yet Loose Change still seemed to me as a contrived piece of shit. It was clear to me that lots of slick bull went into this, a lot of lies by people who see themselves as super-important heroes who feel they must uncover a conspiracy that thousands were in on.

Needless to say, the tragedy of 9/11 was not an inside job, but an act of unspeakable evil by terrorist assholes half the world away. Just just for fun, I feel like beating the everliving hell out of the conspiracy theorists one last time. This is why truthers are full of shit:

One; they say that the Twin Towers were brought down by explosives, not the planes. All right, the towers were more than 100 stories tall each, both with strong internal and external structural integrity. It doesn't take a math wiz to figure that engineers are going to need a hell-of-a-lot of explosives to take them down.

So how are the government technicians going to do this? Well, obviously, with such a massive amount of bombs needed to bring down the towers, they had to stock them up for a long time. Let's guess it takes a month to fill two hundred-story towers with explosives. That would mean that for one full month, strange men and women were coming into the Trade Towers day and night, carrying unlabeled packages.

All right, but obviously, they can't let c4 just lay around the building, someone, or a security camera, is bound to notice that unknown people are piling up explosive-smelling boxes all over your office building. So they had to put them behind some sort of wall, maybe a wall so people wouldn't go snooping into these unmarked crates, right? Therefore, hundreds of construction workers would be working constantly to seal unmarked, explosive-smelling, unlabeled boxes into the wall of your office building. Hmm, imagine, no one noticed?

But you know why no one noticed? Because this is all bull shit.

Two; the Pentagon was hit with a missile not a plane. All right, other than the hundreds of witnesses who saw the plane flying low and those who saw it flying into the building, who must of all been in on it, Loose Change states that there are absolutely no pictures of plane wreckage around the Pentagon. Let's see...

What about this:Or this:But what am I thinking about? These are facts, something that should never be confused with the September 11 Truthers, or assholes, if you will. Indisputable photo evidence was something they never did like...

Three; Flight 93 did not crash because of a heroic re-taking of the plane by the passengers, but was shot down by the government. Conspiracy theorists also believe that the cell phone calls on the flights were impossible, and that it is indeed possible that no one was aboard the plane.

For both of these to be true, first, the members who were supposedly on Flight 93 not only knew about the planned attack, but faked their phone calls in cooperation with their family members. Second, those family members would never be able to come back and live with their families or in public again, for fear of their scheme getting out. Third, the black box found from the downed plane had to be faked ahead of time. Fourth, the planes had to be either reotely controlled to be able to fly on their own, or some unlucky soul was chosen to fly a plane that was about to be blown out of the sky.Bullshit.

Fourth; thousands of people were in on the job, including the Administration, airplane specialists, demolition experts, everyone who worked at or around the Pentagon, the people who cleaned up the plane (or 'missile') at the Pentagon, pilots in the military, people who worked security cameras, people who cleaned up the remains of Flight 93, and the people who were aboard flight 93.

I think I'll let Cracked handle this "point:"

"And keep in mind, this can't be chump change. Even in a world where every structural engineering desk jockey is okay with mass murder, they're still not going to risk jail and career ruin and walk away from a huge book deal for ten grand. Oh, no, it's got to be millions, per person, just to make it worth it. Even a dedicated conspirator would need to know he or she was set for life...

Say the average payout was ten million (barely enough to live rich the rest of your life, but let's just say)."

They figured, and I agree, that this massive conspiracy would cost... $5,000,000,000,000, or five trillion dollars.

From Cracked: "And here's the kicker...

100% of the people who were offered the deal, took it.

After all, we don't have a single person who has come running into the offices of the New York Times, waving a check and saying, "look! Here's a check for ten million smackers that the government gave me to be silent about 9/11! Can you believe these assholes? Now give me my book deal!"

Not one. Even with the lure of fame and fortune and a chance to go down in history as The Guy Who Saved American Democracy, even with the crushing guilt of seeing thousands of bodies hauled out of the rubble, even seeing the horrors of a nation turned inside out by war and paranoia that was completely manufactured as a gruesome hoax, some of these people having their own friends and families and colleagues die in the attacks, not one turned down the money... or took the money and came forward anyway."

I could destroy some more crazy conspiracy theories, but I just don't have the time, and Cracked and Popular Mechanics have done a better job than I. But the mindset of the 9/11 conspirator is clear: everyone around them is morally corrupt. People are so greedy that they will watch their friends and families die at the hands of the government for a big pay day. In their delusional conscience, they see themselves as the heroes of justice. They think they are better than the average person who would give away the life of their siblings for a big fat check. So one and for all, to all the truthers out there: go fuck yourselves.

Exactly eight years ago to the minute, hundred of people were dying. Many died of burns, trauma, or smoke inhalation. Just minutes later would almost 3,000 in total be murdered by an imperialist attack by the forces of Islamist terrorism. People jumped from the Towers in order to not suffer burns any longer-- people walked stunned over the Brooklyn Bridge-- over 200 firefighters did not return home.

And few remember.

We should be ashamed of ourselves. In the days following the attacks of September 11th, 2001, some of the most parroted lines were "Lest we forget" and "Never forget." By the end of 2005 it was apparent that the majority of Americans had forgotten, or just did not care.

Think about the resolve of the 90% of Americans who stood up to call for a blistering attack on the center of Islamist terrorism. That not only meant the Taliban, but state sponsors, like Iraq, Iran, and Syria. Time had come to finally destroy those who had funded this type of murder for decades.

Do you remember how idiotic the 10% of the rest of the country looked when they opposed attacking Osama? Those people formed the core of the anti-Iraq War detractors and the Kerry '04 and Obama '08 campaigns. They are just as stupid now as they were while Ground Zero was still smoldering.

President Bush made a roaring and strong speech just nine days after the attack, showing just what we had to do. Americans were supportive of it then, when we actually remembered the attack:

We're really so concerned that three terrorists were waterboarded? We're so concerned that Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the planner of the deaths of 3,000 Americans and the decapitator of Daniel Pearl, had a gunshot fired near him to scare him? I don't care. He murdered thousands of innocent people. I just don't care about him getting waterboarded, and neither should you.

We whine so much about the tools which prevented the next attack. We are disgusted by the lessons learned from the attacks.

Say what you want about George W. Bush, but he kept his promises. He promised that he wouldn't forget. He promised that he would make sure to avenge September 11th, 2001, and make sure that it would not reoccur on his watch.

Thursday, September 10, 2009

Congressman Joe Wilson, Republican Congressman from South Carolina, is becoming the talk of the town, both live & viral I must add. During last nights Joint Session of Congress, Obama claimed that illegals will not be covered in this plan, which is a complete fallacy, obviously Congressman Wilson was so frustrated by the lies, he yelled out "You lie!".

I could call it the lie heard around the world. That would just be immature.

Though there has been considerable backlash from around the Conservative world, I particularly believe it was in poor taste to yell this in the halls of Congress, anywhere else would have been fine with me, there has also been a feeling is justified pride in what Congressman Wilson did last night. Think about, the American people have been lied to constantly during this health care debate by Obama, Reid, Pelosi, and almost all other Democrat hacks.

We have seen the frustration across Town Hall's across the United States, we have seen the anger at Tea Parties across the Nation, we have heard the outrage on cable television & radio shows. Is it so unreasonable for a United States Congressman to also be frustrated, angry, and outraged over the lies & proposals which Obama is pushing? I think not.

While Congressman Wilson might be spanked by the likes of Senator McCain, I in uncertain terms believe this man to be acting on his emotions, and his emotions tell a definite story about this man. He is a passionate Conservative, should we punish him for that? Its not like he bit off another human beings finger, like some radical moveon.org nutroot did.

In conclusion, good morning Mr.Wilson, while you have possibly ignited the Conservative movement even more against Obamacare (I see this rallying Conservatives even more then ever), you are about to endure nothing short of pure hell in Washington D.C. I sure hope good sir, that you can withstand it, and come out atop. We need more passion likes yours sir, just next time, don't do it in Congress.......

President Barack Obama came out with one of the most divisive, angering speeches in the history of the office of the President of the United States. He may have been attempting simply to rally the left, but he wound up attacking opponents of his plan viciously.

Remember George W. Bush, who many called incredibly divisive? Yeah, that guy. Turns out that his sense of decorum and decency actually made him into a halfway decent speaker after all.

And Obama, who was hailed as the best public speaker since Scipio mated with Aristotle, is just coming across as an abrasive jerk.

Let's take a look at what he said:

The best example is the claim made not just by radio and cable talk show hosts, but by prominent politicians, that we plan to set up panels of bureaucrats with the power to kill off senior citizens. Now, such a charge would be laughable if it weren't so cynical and irresponsible. It is a lie, plain and simple.

That's right. They're liars! Let's turn to Bush. Do you remember during his eight years as President, how the Democrats regularly covered up evidence of Saddam Hussein's ties with terrorism and his stockpile of chemical weapons? Did Bush ever call them liars? No. He should have, but he had too much of a sense of decency.

And what makes what Obama did even worse is that he did it during a speech in which his people said he was trying to unite the country behind health care. It didn't seem like that to me-- he was basically trying to call Republicans and Conservative Democrats liars and terrible people.

I'm halfway surprised he didn't call them racists, too.

What Obama doesn't realize is that he was elected by accident. Yes, he received almost 53% of the vote, but the votes that put him over the top were those who were dumb enough not to take him at his word, along with other idiotic portions of the country: college kids, many first time voters, and effete leftists. Obama's pool is getting smaller and smaller as college kids are becoming more reserved with politics and many of the working-class, voting people are getting pissed off.

And you know what? Good for Joe Wilson. I remember Bush getting heckled by John Kerry and Ted Kennedy, and that was for stating his opinion. Obama lays out a massive whopper to America, and he should be checked for it-- right there on the floor. That's the job of the legislature, to check the power of the President.

Wednesday, September 9, 2009

If you follow the daily ins & outs of the political world, you will be familiar with two common sayings among the bases of both major political parties :Republican In Name Only - RINO.Democrat In Name Only - DINO.

Republicans will point at Senator Olympia Snowe as a Republican In Name Only, and Democrats will point at former Georgia Senator Zell Miller as a Democrat In Name Only.

While the political bickering is fun, which I succumb to at times, I have a new INO to showcase to the world. American In Name Only - AINO.

Defined as an American who will never support their Nation in combat against the enemy or evil in general, is always attempting to paint the freedoms & greatness of this Nation as oppressive & evil towards the rest of the world, or the lack of understanding of what makes America great, while attempting to destroy it.

The members on this short list are well known, so without further delay, I would like to present the opening class of American's In Name Only :Michael Moore.Oliver Stone.ACLU.Cynthia McKinney.John Adams Project (have to research this group to understand it is radical left-wing).Van Jones.Rosie O'Donnell.

Tuesday, September 8, 2009

Families who fail to get health insurance could be fined up to $3,800 under a health care reform plan proposed by a top Senate negotiator.

Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., who as chairman of the Senate Finance Committee is leading talks among the "Gang of Six" senators to hammer out a bipartisan compromise, offered what he described on Tuesday as a "framework" and not a "final product."

But the detailed proposal comes just days ahead of a self-imposed Sept. 15 deadline for such a deal. Baucus is pushing his committee members hard to hammer out a bill, and those details come as strong suggestions.

The framework, a copy of which was obtained by FOX News, includes what amounts to a no-choice option. It would make health insurance mandatory, like auto insurance.

The plan would provide tax credits to help small employers and help cover the cost for households making up to three times the federal poverty level. That's about $66,000 for a family of four, and $32,000 for an individual.

Those who still don't sign up would face hefty fines, starting at $750 a year for individuals and $1,500 for families -- for those making up to three times the poverty level.

For those who make more than that, the penalty on individuals would jump to $950 and the penalty on families would jump to $3,800.

There would be a few exemptions, including for Native Americans and for those making incomes below the federal poverty level.

The plan does not include a government-run health insurance plan to soften the blow of the coverage mandate.

Instead, Baucus opts for a system of non-profit cooperatives, as part of a broader health insurance exchange.

As a way to pay for the package, estimated to cost under $900 billion over 10 years, Baucus is proposing a 35 percent excise tax on insurance companies for high-cost plans -- defined as those above $8,000 for individuals and $21,000 for family plans.

The Senate Finance Committee is meeting Tuesday, as President Obama prepares to deliver a high-stakes speech to both chambers of Congress Wednesday night in a bid to invigorate the push for reform.

Four committees have already passed their bills; Baucus' panel is the only one yet to act. His committee's bill is also the only one that could be considered bipartisan.

Baucus hits major elements in his plan that other top Democrats say are important. His plan would require health insurance plans to guarantee coverage and would prohibit them from excluding coverage based on pre-existing conditions.

Premiums would be allowed to vary based only on tobacco use, age and size of family.

But the fines pose a dilemma for Obama. As a candidate, the president campaigned hard against making health insurance a requirement, saying it's too expensive to mandate. White House officials have since backed away somewhat from that stance, but there's no indication that Obama would support fines.

Question : Did you know that large sectors of Americans cannot use their Constitutional right to freedom of speech, in regards to political matters in a joint effort?Answer : Then why is this not being covered by the media every single day, night, and moonrise to the Mars and back?That is a good question indeed.

I have written numerous times on the censorship of political free speech that has targeted Church's across the United States of America, who if they want to make a political endorsement, better make sure the IRS does not find out. This is a stealth way of political censorship via the tax codes & IRS.

Corporations have also been targeted, by not allowing them to be involved in political campaigns either. When this is without a doubt against the foundations of the Constitution, they have just as much as right to endorse or support a candidate, as I do, or as Bruce Willis does.

Great news, it appears the United States Supreme Court will overturn sections of John McCains "campaign finance law", which would finally allow for Corporations to be involved in the political process, just as the rest of America is as well. I would also hope, one day the tax law that restricts tax free organizations from endorsing candidates, especially Church's, will be ruled un-constitutional as well.

Also, some claim that this will destroy Democracy, considering this will lead to more advertisements, debates, etc....I highly disagree.

It appears that in our society, people tend to pass blame along to the victims of crime, or circumstance of the issues,. or just every day actions. Liberals are known for blaming the victim, hell, they even blamed Erin Andrews, an ESPN sideline reporter, for what occurred to her (while she was getting dressed in her hotel room, some creep filmed her through the peep hole in the door, they blamed her...because she is a woman in a mans line of work), instead of the creep who actually committed the crime.

Now we have Van Jones, a man who according to Valerie Jarrett, Obama has been following his antics since "Oakland", who is a self avowed communist, black nationalist, has a weird combination of 9/11 truther & blame America for the brutal terrorist attacks on September eleventh, and is a large proponent of "social justice", which is codeword for government theft from those that have worked hard for their money, to those that don't deserve a damn dime of that same money.

As we know, Van Jones was selected by Obama, to be his "green jobs czar", a 100% un-constitutional situation in the first place, however, that is a discussion for another day. Now, Jones had a position of power within the White House, and the ear of the President of the United States of America, so Conservative talk show host Glenn Beck, deeply concerned about this connection, started to expose the man that is Van Jones over the course of approximately two weeks. Because of his hard work, and millions of Americans, plus a few bloggers who found some interesting information as well, Van Jones resigned..........

A well won victory for America, and the Conservative side of the American political spectrum.

What do liberals do? They start defending Van Jones, who in this case is not the victim, of being a great hero of the green movement, even though he believes the murders of 3,000 Americans was possibly an inside job by the Bush administration, and he is a communist who ironically was given a "green jobs" position inside the White House.

I don't understand it. America is the victim of Van Jones, and instead of defending the victim, they are defending the criminal. I guess the blame America brigade & sentiment among the liberal nutroots in the main stream media & blogosphere, just won't end.

"Some Conservative Republicans are wondering where the 2010 Conservative revolution will come from, what congressional districts will shift from Democrat to Republican hands, how we can accomplish these goals, and can we overcome the horrific past two congressional cycles? Considering top political gurus all agree with the Democrats could lose dozens House of seats next election, that the American people do not want what the Democrats are selling, and the American people that punished the Republicans for not being Conservative, are doing likewise to far-left Democrats.

Did you know that elected Democrats are presently representing 72 Republican leaning congressional districts! 72 Congressional districts which are Republican leaning, currently have Democrats in those seats. If the Republicans could actually reclaim their own ground, with staunch Conservatism, we could control the House of Representatives with over 32 seats over the Democrats. If you factor in the ten Republicans who represent Democrat leaning districts, and if those districts went to the Democrats, Republicans could still control the House of Representatives by 22 seats in the House. Also, 25 states in the United States lean Republican, while 23 lean Democrat, and two are about even. How can the Democrats control 60 seats, when 50 of those seats are in Republican leaning states?

You can check out the information at the Cook political website, however, I wish to list all of the Republican districts currently represented by Democrats, just to make a point, that if we want to reclaim America, we can by just reclaiming our very own districts. From the highest level of Republican dominance, to the least amount :

Mississippi's fourth congressional district.

Texas seventeenth congressional district.

Idaho's first congressional district.

Alabama's second congressional district.

Utah's second congressional district.

Mississippi's first congressional district.

Missouri's fourth congressional district.

Oklahoma's second congressional district.

Maryland's first congressional district."

Tennessee's fourth congressional district.

Tennessee's sixth congressional district.

Alabama's fifth congressional district.

Louisiana's third congressional district.

Virginia's ninth congressional district.

Georgia's eighth congressional district.

New Hampshire's first congressional district.

New York's first congressional district.

Texas twenty-eighth congressional district.

Fellow Conservatives & Republicans, if we want to retake the House of Representatives, all of the building blocks are there, the numbers are there, we just need to work as hard as ever, and we need to be as Conservative as ever. We can do this, I am willing to fight the good fight, are you ready to?